The American Psychological Association is the largest professional and scientific organization of psychologists in the United States. Its AI-relevant activity runs through three channels: health advisories synthesizing the research literature into recommendations for developers, policymakers, educators and caregivers; congressional advocacy through its science-and-technology advocacy office; and its journals, which publish empirical work on algorithmic bias and psychological assessment.
Health advisories on AI
The APA issued two health advisories on AI in 2025. The first, Artificial Intelligence and Adolescent Well-being, was published June 3, 2025 and is summarized at Artificial Intelligence and Adolescent Well-being: An APA Health Advisory (June 2025). It defines adolescence as ages 10 to 25, distinguishes generative from interactive AI, and organizes nine recommendation clusters covering simulated human relationships, age-differentiated design, educational uses, harmful content, health-information accuracy, data privacy, protection of youth likenesses, caregiver support, AI literacy, and research funding. The second, Health advisory: Use of generative AI chatbots and wellness applications for mental health, followed in November 2025 and is summarized at APA Health Advisories on AI and Adolescent / Mental-Health Well-being (2025); it centers on failed suicidality detection and on clinician impersonation by AI personas.
Both advisories were produced through expert advisory panels of academic psychologists with APA staff leads. On the June advisory the staff leads were Mitchell J. Prinstein, APA chief of psychology and a professor of psychology and neuroscience at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Corbin Evans, deputy chief of advocacy for science and technology; and Ludmila Nunes, senior director for scientific knowledge and expertise (Source: apa.org).
The AI advisories continue a series. The APA had previously issued a health advisory on adolescent social-media use and recommendations on healthy video content for youth, and the June 2025 advisory explicitly builds on both, stating that youth safety should be addressed early in AI's evolution so as not to "repeat the same harmful mistakes that were made with social media."
Positions
The association's stated position is that generative AI chatbots and wellness applications lack the scientific evidence base and regulatory oversight required to substitute for qualified mental-health care, and that they carry risks particularly for adolescents and other vulnerable users. It characterizes AI personas claiming licensed clinical credentials as an "unambiguous and unacceptable danger," citing a Character.AI "psychologist" persona that appeared to validate a user's violent thoughts.
On design, the APA's consistent asks are protective-by-default settings rather than opt-in protections, recurring disclosure that the interlocutor is not human, automated linking to crisis resources including the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, human-oversight and reporting pathways, minimized persuasive and engagement-maximizing design in products accessible to youth, and independent pre-deployment testing for psychological harm. On research access it asks for mechanisms allowing independent scientists to access data held by technology companies, covering algorithmic functions, content moderation and user-engagement metrics.
The June advisory also stakes out a data-protection position that extends beyond conventional youth-privacy framing: it names "biometric and neural information from emerging technologies" as sensitive on the ground that such data can reveal mental states and cognitive processes, connecting APA's advocacy to Cognitive Liberty.
Congressional and regulatory activity
The APA testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on chatbot harms to young people, appearing alongside Matthew Raine and Megan Garcia, the plaintiff parents in Raine v. OpenAI, Inc. and Garcia v. Character Technologies, Inc. (Source: apaservices.org). Its advisory framework tracks the structure of California SB 243 — Companion Chatbots — bot disclosure, crisis-escalation protocols, and default-on youth protections — which the statute partially codifies. The advisories are also relevant to the Federal Trade Commission's 6(b) inquiry into chatbot effects on minors, a separate proceeding.
Relationships
- supports: Artificial Intelligence and Adolescent Well-being: An APA Health Advisory (June 2025), APA Health Advisories on AI and Adolescent / Mental-Health Well-being (2025) — the two 2025 advisories
- supports: AI Mental Health and Psychological Harm — supplies the clinical-profession position
- related: California SB 243 — Companion Chatbots — statute whose disclosure and crisis-protocol structure tracks the advisories
- related: Raine v. OpenAI, Inc., Garcia v. Character Technologies, Inc., Character.AI Litigation (umbrella) — APA testified alongside plaintiffs in the first two
- related: AI Literacy, Age Verification, Cognitive Liberty, Companion Chatbot Harms — Cross-Cutting Analysis